impeachment inquiry hearings thread

[Tuco 5094]

35 minutes ago, BNB said:

Dems should have just censured him, then moved onto passing bills.  All the public sees is Dems constantly attacking him and trying to impeach him, while little else is being done to improve our country.

So, I assume you support the Senate censuring him, and would be against Republicans who don't?

 

[Foosters 18286]

Wait, multiple posters on here think the chance he gets impeached is "zero?"

[RomaVicta 30609]

34 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

That's what morons see.  The public who have critical thought capabilities want the corrupt asshole out. 

Don't forget moral standards or integrity when describing that part of the public. The only excuse for the rest are that they don't bother to know. The rest know and support wickedness and acts harmful to the US.

[jimmyjazz 47252]

1 minute ago, Tuco said:

So, I assume you support the Senate censuring him, and would be against Republicans who don't?

 

Of course not.  He's a troll and needs to be crowdbanned.  I'm going to start the process.

[sachick 1189]

3 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

ok, i'll play along.

which fact witnesses were presented by the gop and denied by schiff?  what evidence would they present that would refute the evidence brought forward against trump?

the republicans complained (rightfully so) that there were no witnesses testifying that had first hand/conversational knowledge of the specifics of the withheld aid and the requests/demands the president was making.  the problem is that all the witnesses called that fit this description, defied their subpoenas.  mulvaney, pompeo, bolton, perry, pence, trump.

come back at me with actual answers, not "but obama" and i'll be happy to take you seriously.  it would be a better effort than the republicans have shown during this entire process.

Just double checking, but I didn't miss a response to this right? He didn't grow balls and actually answer questions?

[hayden_horn 11402]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Of course not.  He's a troll and needs to be crowdbanned.  I'm going to start the process.

i don't think he does need to be banned. i think we need to understand exactly what the 42% are like.

[jimmyjazz 47252]

Just now, hayden_horn said:

i don't think he does need to be banned. i think we need to understand exactly what the 42% are like.

I don't think he's serious.

[Brisketexan 106974]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

I don't think he's serious.

Lotta people said that about Trump when he announced his candidacy.

Insanity is reality these days -- best try to understand it.

[DDD Dad 14661]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

i don't think he does need to be banned. i think we need to understand exactly what the 42% are like.

[BNB 100]

10 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Negged again for lying. You know that Biden was representing the interests of the United States in conditioning the aid on the removal of a corrupt prosecutor. He acted in the open and executing American policy. His act is the antithesis of what Trump did.

Now, if someone can provide evidence that Biden was indeed acting for his son or that he in some other way benefited illegally, then to hell with him and his son.

Enough of you. 

I'll go back to just reading this channel every now and then, so I don't get negged off Surly

Edited December 10, 2019 by BNB

[jimmyjazz 47252]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Lotta people said that about Trump when he announced his candidacy.

Insanity is reality these days -- best try to understand it.

I've said as much many times, when it's clear that the person is arguing in good faith.  BNB is not.  He refuses to actually defend any points brought against him.  He's a troll.  Fuck him -- they muddy the waters.

[jimmyjazz 47252]

1 minute ago, BNB said:

I'll go back to just reading every now and then, so I don't get negged of Surly

See?  Troll.

[Brisketexan 106974]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

I've said as much many times, when it's clear that the person is arguing in good faith.  BNB is not.  He refuses to actually defend any points brought against him.  He's a troll.  Fuck him -- they muddy the waters.

Again.....I have no idea how to tell the difference between Trump, a Trumpkin, and a troll.  They're all functionally equal.  The times we live in.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Just double checking, but I didn't miss a response to this right? He didn't grow balls and actually answer questions?

They never answer questions, they just ask questions, silly.

It takes intelligence to answer questions. They got shortchanged in that department. And the penis size department.


Also, I make a motion for the admins to institute an IQ test to be able to post on this board. I think that would solve the issue of the infestation of idiots.

[Captainant 28588]

52 minutes ago, BNB said:

Dems should have just censured him, then moved onto passing bills.  All the public sees is Dems constantly attacking him and trying to impeach him, while little else is being done to improve our country.

You do realize that the senate hasn't even looked at 80% of the bills the House has passed so far, right? What about mcconnel not playing ball is the dems fault?

[henrygandorf 29228]

6 minutes ago, BNB said:

I'll go back to just reading this channel every now and then, so I don't get negged off Surly

i won't neg you, i'm just trying to get a feel for the other side here.

if trump is innocent of what he's being accused of doing, and the evidence says so, then why won't he let the people close to him testify, and release the documents that prove his innocence?

there are two defenses by republicans here:

1. yeah, he did it.  he shouldn't have, but he did, and he won't do it again.  it was bad, but not impeachable.  let's move on.

2. he's innocent.

 

if you're really voting #2, then please answer my question.  if you're voting #1, which every republican should, then i disagree, but i understand. 

[henrygandorf 29228]

3 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

They never answer questions, they just ask questions, silly.

It takes intelligence to answer questions. They got shortchanged in that department. And the penis size department.


Also, I make a motion for the admins to institute an IQ test to be able to post on this board. I think that would solve the issue of the infestation of idiots.

 

i'm against an iq test.

but in favor of a penis-size test.

[Bama Chick 28596]

I'll go back to just reading this channel every now and then, so I don't get negged off Surly

Pussy. Don’t run away. If you’re so secure in your position you should be man enough to stay and defend it with truth and facts and well thought out arguments.

Oh, what’s that? You don’t have any of those things at your disposal?

Then, yeah, I guess your best course of action is to run away and put your head in the sand just in case some actual facts seep into your empty head and cause a disturbance to your carefully curated echo chamber.

So run away you little bitch made beta. Go watch some Fox News so you can imagine that you’re an educated intelligent person and not some tiny limp dicked lemming who worships at the altar of a fat orange short fingered yankee vulgarian.

Fucking snowflake

[Enchubben 5600]

33 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Let me know when he testifies. 

I’m sure Adam Schiff has him as priority witness number 1.

[Dahobbs 18345]

1 hour ago, BNB said:

He had just seen on the news someone showing a video of Biden bragging about getting a Ukraine official fired, so he asked about that also.

Did Biden, the US government generally (including Republicans), and our foreign allies want the Ukrainian official fired for:

a) pursuing an investigation into corruption involving Burisma; or 

b) not pursuing an investigation into corruption involving Burisma.

Hint: the answer is not a). 

[Brisketexan 106974]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Did Biden, the US government generally (including Republicans), and our foreign allies want the Ukrainian official fired for:

a) pursuing an investigation into corruption involving Burisma; or 

b) not pursuing an investigation into corruption involving Burisma.

Hint: the answer is not a). 

Trumpkin: the answer is clearly "potato."

[jimmyjazz 47252]

Moreover, did Biden's heinous act suddenly become public in the summer of 2019?  I remain puzzled as to why Trump didn't dig into this administrative corruption prior to now.  It's a puzzler!

[ndawg 1242]

You guys are doing such a great job taking down their inane talking points that they might have to do something drastic like... like... hide from the Cloak Room for a few days until there's a fresh crop of bullshit to peddle.

[RomaVicta 30609]

36 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Of course not.  He's a troll and needs to be crowdbanned.  I'm going to start the process.

To show where my mind and heart are, I read crowdbanned as crowbarred. I didn't finish determining how I felt about that before seeing my mistake.

But we can't crowbar them. 

That would be wrong.

No quid pro quo.

[Biff Tannen 46190]

22 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Did Biden, the US government generally (including Republicans), and our foreign allies want the Ukrainian official fired for:

a) pursuing an investigation into corruption involving Burisma; or 

b) not pursuing an investigation into corruption involving Burisma.

Hint: the answer is not a). 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5171]

37 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i'm against an iq test.

but in favor of a penis-size test.

I'll bring the ruler.

[Pescado_Rojo 19592]

7 minutes ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

I'll bring the ruler.

Can we use a "Fisherman's ruler"

[GRHorn 105]

SIAP

 

 

[Biff Tannen 46190]

Around 10-12 moderate Democrats can fuck right off.

[horncyclist 1391]

3 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

SIAP

 

 

Oh yeah, censure, that's gonna send a message.

Cowards. You swore an oath.

Edited December 10, 2019 by horncyclist

[Brisketexan 106974]

5 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

SIAP

 

 

Translation:

Some dems are as craven, pathetic, pussies concerned about their re-election over all else as all Republicans are.  So there you have it.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

44 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Moreover, did Biden's heinous act suddenly become public in the summer of 2019?  I remain puzzled as to why Trump didn't dig into this administrative corruption prior to now.  It's a puzzler!

I, too, remained puzzled. Then I started asking myself, "WHERE'S PAUL?"

Oh, wait. That's right. He is a criminal. As are...how many are we up to now? Eight, nine people?

[Captainant 28588]

In other news, the Gates sentencing memo has been released and its got some interesting little nuggets:

Quote

Finally, is important to note that the public nature of this case has made Gates and Gates’ family the subject of intense media scrutiny. Gates’ cooperation has been steadfast despite the fact that the government has asked for his assistance in high profile matters, against powerful individuals, in the midst of a particularly turbulent environment. Gates received pressure not to cooperate with the government, including assurances of monetary assistance. He should be commended for standing up to provide information and public testimony against individuals such as Manafort, Craig, and Stone, knowing well that they enjoy support from the upper echelons of American politics and society. Based on his substantial assistance, the government recommends a downward departure and does not oppose Gates’ request for a probationary sentence.

The motion for downward departure by the prosecution means that they're going to give Gates a very minor to zero amount of jail time or penalties, likely only probation. Gates was *the* star witness in the Manafort trial, and I'd bet that his "extraordinary" level of cooperation has yet to bear all of its fruit.

[Biff Tannen 46190]

To that first bolded part, am I reading correctly that he was offered a bribe to not cooperate?  Do we get to find out who offered this?

[Captainant 28588]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

To that first bolded part, am I reading correctly that he was offered a bribe to not cooperate?  Do we get to find out who offered this?

Yes. Gates was offered a bribe not to cooperate and the filing doesn't say who proffered the bribe but it does immediately reference the people he testified against who "enjoy support from the upper echelons of American politics and society"

[henrygandorf 29228]

6 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

To that first bolded part, am I reading correctly that he was offered a bribe to not cooperate?  Do we get to find out who offered this?

hunter biden.

[Brisketexan 106974]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

hunter biden.

Everyone's talking about John Podesta's emails.

[Mdhorn 6166]

16 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Oh yeah, censure, that's gonna send a message.

Cowards. You swore an oath.

they've always been this way which is why Republicans continuously are able make more and more gains despite a shrinking demographic--see gerrymandering, voter suppression, increased governor power which gets stripped when elections are lost, increased judges...ugh.  They can't help but concede in an effort to maintain.  They don't understand that leading involves actual leadership which can be construed as a symbol of strength.  Or lose doing the wrong thing and sink everybody.   

[Beantown Express 2.0 6597]

8 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

hunter biden.

You know we really need Hunter Biden to testify on why he was trying bribe Rick Gates.  Enough is enough.

[Brisketexan 106974]

2 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

You know we really need Hunter Biden to testify on why he was trying bribe Rick Gates to cover up Jeffrey Epstein procuring child sex slaves for John Podesta to sacrifice to Hillary Clinton in the basement of a pizza place.

FIF WWG1WGA.

[henrygandorf 29228]

26 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Translation:

Some dems are as craven, pathetic, pussies concerned about their re-election over all else as all Republicans are.  So there you have it.

i've heard of these dems, and seen them in interviews, so i know they exist, but i have a separate question...

is this a real thing?  are there districts where there are people that are so pro-trump that they care about how their representative votes on impeachment, but so understanding, that they'll still vote for someone with a (d) next to their name as long as they support a censure and go against party on the impeachment vote?

i don't buy it.

 

 

Edited December 10, 2019 by henrygandorf
stop it

[henrygandorf 29228]

wtfdp

Edited December 10, 2019 by henrygandorf

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

6 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

 You know we really need Hunter Biden to testify on why he was trying bribe Rick Gates to cover up Jeffrey Epstein procuring child sex slaves for John Podesta to sacrifice to Hillary Clinton in the basement of a pizza place. Enough is enough.

 

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

FIF WWG1WGA.

Somewhere in there you need to put George Soros. Apparently he IS the Keymaster.

[WhatTheBuck 28935]

2 hours ago, Helobious said:

I completely agree with this. I thought this was all a huge waste of time, and still believe there’s a 0% chance that he’ll get impeached. I also think he’s a lock to get re-elected. But I bet he and other politicians will probably think twice before engaging in these kind of activities again. Even though he’ll escape punishment there’s no questioning that this has been a massive pain in the ass for him.

There is a 100% chance he'll be impeached. There is a 0% chance he'll be removed from office by the Senate.

[sachick 1189]

SIAP
 
 

Censure is bullshit. Isn’t much more than a strongly worded letter.

[TexArcher 39074]

4 minutes ago, sachick said:

Censure is bullshit. Isn’t much more than a strongly worded letter.

We strenuously object to all the treason!  Please don't do it anymore. 

Love always,

Congress.

[Brisketexan 106974]

3 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

We technically object to all the treason, but only because we feel like we have to.  Please don't do it anymore.* 

Love always,

Congress.

* But we totally had our fingers crossed when we said that last part.  Please keep it up, because we're running out of strategies to hold onto power as a minority party.

FIFAccuracy.

[Tuco 5094]

i've heard of these dems, and seen them in interviews, so i know they exist, but i have a separate question...
is this a real thing?  are there districts where there are people that are so pro-trump that they care about how their representative votes on impeachment, but so understanding, that they'll still vote for someone with a (d) next to their name as long as they support a censure and go against party on the impeachment vote?
i don't buy it.
 
 

My guess is that areas with a very strong union block will lean Trump nationally, but Dem locally due to union/party interaction at the local level.

[hayden_horn 11402]

Just now, Tuco said:

My guess is that areas with a very strong union block will lean Trump nationally, but Dem locally due to union/party interaction at the local level.

this seems right to me. 

however, sometimes doing the right thing is worth losing your job.

[TwiceHorn 32092]

1 hour ago, Captainant said:

In other news, the Gates sentencing memo has been released and its got some interesting little nuggets:

The motion for downward departure by the prosecution means that they're going to give Gates a very minor to zero amount of jail time or penalties, likely only probation. Gates was *the* star witness in the Manafort trial, and I'd bet that his "extraordinary" level of cooperation has yet to bear all of its fruit.

It's EXTREMELY unusual for the US government to agree to a probationary sentence.  Doesn't mean the judge is going to go along with it, but it is so rare as to be extremely notable.  Particularly where the indicted crimes normally would carry a 5-10 year guidelines sentence and a 20 or 30 year max.

Edited December 10, 2019 by TwiceHorn